To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

Storing Cookies (See : ) help us to bring you our services at . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: return of the aether - article of atlantis rising magazine  (Read 6315 times)

Offline ayrton

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
return of the aether - article of atlantis rising magazine
« on: August 01, 2005, 04:51:52 AM »
Hello, nice forum
issue 53

It's an ancient concept revived in modern physics in the 19th century, disposed of by Einstein in the 20th century with the publication of his seminal paper, On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies where he first proposed what is now known as the Special Theory of Relativity, and now going through a second rebirth in the 21st century the Aether returns as a fundamental ingredient in a Grand Unified Theory. Aether in Greek mythology was the personification of the "upper sky," space and heaven. He is the pure, upper air that the gods breathe, as opposed to "aer" which mortals breathed. He was the son of Erebus, the Greek God of darkness who dwelt in the underworld. In physics and philosophy, aether was once believed to be a substance which filled all of space. Aristotle included it as a fifth element on the principle that nature abhorred a vacuum. Aether was also called "Quintessence." The luminiferous aether of the better known 19th-century invocation was a concept held by some physicists and was an attempt to reconcile electromagnetic theory and Newtonian physics (http:// Einstein could sometimes speak as though the aether was superfluous (Einstein, 1905) and at other times say "space without aether is unthinkable" (Einstein 1922). This was due, of course, to not starting with physical terms-matter, its motion, and its interactions (force) [http:// michelson.html]. Since the wide acceptance of the Special Theory of Relativity, scientists have generally accepted the notion that the speed of light in a vacuum is the upper limit of all material speeds. For this reason, space travel greater than the speed of light is usually considered unattainable except through special contrivance, which is used to alter the properties of the space-time continuum. If the Special Theory of Relativity is correct, the speed of light in vacuo is the only universal absolute. Another way of stating this principle is that light or, more precisely, electromagnetic waves have no preferred frame of reference. Often cited in support of this principle is reference to the classic Michelson-Morley interferometer experiment. This experiment was an attempt to measure the earth's motion through the hypothetical ether at rest in space. The negative result of this experiment was used to prove that Einstein's proposition that the speed of light is not altered by addition of velocities with light-emitting objects or that an ether was necessary for explaining the propagation of light across empty space. Professor Laro Schatzer has made this cogent statement regarding an ether frame: "There have been a variety of theories to describe electromagnetic waves (light) as excitations of some medium, quite in analogy to sonic waves which propagate in the medium air. This hypothetical medium was called the ether and it was supposed to be at rest in the absolute space-time frame. That is why this frame is also called the ether frame sometimes. Since the establishment of the theory of special relativity it has become extremely unpopular among scientists to speak about "ether." However, we know today that electromagnetic waves are indeed excitations of some "medium." However, this medium is not a solid or a liquid in the classical sense, but it is governed by the laws of quantum mechanics. Quantum field theorists found the name vacuum for it. Some people interpret the vacuum as space-time itself, but this does not cover the fact that its true nature still remains a mystery. Anyhow, the term quantum ether might be used to indicate a possible modern synthesis of both concepts." A number of scientists have now revived theories of the ether and a few have reanalyzed the Michelson and Morley experiment as well as pointing out positive results from other experiments. Physicist Paul Marmet has written: "We show that Michelson and Morley used an over-simplified description and failed to notice that their calculation is not compatible with their own hypothesis that light is traveling at a constant velocity in all frames. During the last century, the Michelson- Morley equations have been used without realizing that two essential fundamental phenomena are missing in the Michelson- Morley demonstration. We show that the velocity of the mirror must be taken into account to calculate the angle of reflection of light. Using the Huygens principle, we see that the angle of reflection of light on a moving mirror is a function of the velocity of the mirror. This has been ignored in the Michelson-Morley calculation. Also, due to the transverse direction of the moving frame, light does not enter in the instrument at 90 degrees as assumed in the Michelson-Morley experiment. We acknowledge that the basic idea suggested by Michelson- Morley to test the variance of space-time, using a comparison between the times taken by light to travel in the parallel direction with respect to a transverse direction is very attractive. However, we show here that the usual predictions are not valid, because of those two classical secondary phenomena, which have not been taken into account. When these overlooked phenomena are taken into account, we see that a null result, in the Michelson- Morley experiment, is the natural consequence, resulting from the assumption of an absolute frame of reference and Galilean transformations. On the contrary, a shift of the interference fringes would be required in order to support Einstein's relativity. Therefore, for the last century, the relativity theory has been based on a misleading calculation." ( miller.htm) Also, the ether drift experiments of Dayton Miller have received new attention and seem to indicate a positive result for the existence of an ether. There seems to be a growing preponderance of evidence that a space ether medium exists and that physical theories on gravitation, inertia, electromagnetism, and nuclear forces as well as cosmological theories will need to take account of these. It is even possible that an extensive revision of theoretical physics will be necessitated by these discoveries, both old and new. If a velocity-dependent medium such as the ether could be established by experiment, then it could open the door to alternative explanations to SR and GR regarding physical phenomena. If this ether is quantized, then we could explore the theoretical nature of a quantum ether. Is gravity a result of some state of the quantum ether? A complete theory of the ether has been attempted but these theories lack the sweep and power of modern mathematical theories. A complete theory of the ether would not only account for the origin of forces, but the origin of matter and mass. Past the- orizing has postulated the existence of circulating flows in a hydrodynamic ether that form hollow or ring vortices that give rise to electromagnetic forces and constitute the elementary particles that make up the atomic nature of the world. Experiments conducted on the alternating gradient synchrotron with colliding protons seem to indicate that protons behave like composite vortices as described by Helmholtz and others in their excellent treatises on hydrodynamics. In 1897, the English physicist J. J. Thomson discovered the electron and proposed a model for the structure of the atom. Thomson knew that electrons had a negative charge and thought that matter must have a positive charge. His model looked like raisins stuck on the surface of a lump of pudding. Rutherford thought that the negative electrons orbited a positive center in a manner like the solar system where the planets orbit the sun. Bohr came up with the first non-classical description of the electron in order to explain why electrons do not lose energy and spiral into the nucleus of the atom. Schr?dinger pictured the electron as a standing wave. Physicist Max Born turned the electron into a cloud of probability. Modern quantum theory treats the electron as a point-particle with no specific structure or extension in space. The many versions of the new String theories treat the electron as an extended 1-dimensional string or loop, and some variations treat it as a 2- dimensional structure including a ring-like vortex structure. Lord Kelvin was the first to propose a vortex ring as a model for the electron. This seems to be undergoing a revival in new proposals in string theory, now known as M-Theory. One mainstream physicist who is raising waves about ether drift experiments and the detection of absolute motion is Reginald T. Cahill of Flinders University in Adelaide, Australia. On this centenary anniversary of Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity (1905-2005), he has written a critical review of Einstein's postulates: "The Einstein postulates assert an invariance of the propagation speed of light in vacuum for any observer, and which amounts to a presumed absence of any preferred frame. The postulates appear to be directly linked to relativistic effects which emerge from Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity, which is based upon the concept of a flat space-time ontology, and which then lead to the General Theory of Relativity with its curved space-time model for gravity. While the relativistic effects are well established experimentally it is now known that numerous experiments, beginning with the Michelson-Morley experiment of 1887, have always shown that the postulates themselves are false, namely that there is a detectable local preferred frame of reference. This critique briefly reviews the experimental evidence regarding the failure of the postulates (of the Special Theory of Relativity), and the implications for understanding of fundamental physics, and in particular for our understanding of gravity?" (The Einstein Postulates: 1905-2005, a Critical Review of the Evidence by Reginald T. Cahill (professor of theoretical physics), Flinders University). Nicola Tesla, the prodigal genius and inventor of the 19th and 20th century, made this statement: "There manifests itself in the fully developed being, Man, a desire mysterious, inscrutable and irresistible: to imitate nature, to create, to work himself the wonders he perceives.... Long ago he recognized that all perceptible matter comes from a primary substance, or tenuity beyond conception, filling all space, the Akasha or luminiferous ether, which is acted upon by the life-giving Prana or creative force, calling into existence, in never-ending cycles all things and phenomena. The primary substance, thrown into infinitesimal whirls of prodigious velocity, becomes gross matter, the force subsiding, the motion ceases and matter disappears, reverting to the primary substance." Tesla opposed Einstein's ideas and now he may be vindicated by new experiments, including one to be performed in the International Space Station in 2007-2008 to detect the absolute motion of the earth through the aether. The new popular notion of the aether is embodied in the concept of Zero Point Energy (ZPE) and the Zero Point Field (ZPF), however I have written that I believe ZPE is the activity we detect in the Aether and not the Aether per se. My model of the Aether is of a superfluid substance that constitutes physical space itself. French physicist Mayeul Arminjon in his Ether Theory of Gravitation: Why and How? (Aether, Relativity and Superfluidity by Barry C. Mingst) writes: "The first point is that, in order that it does not brake the motion of material bodies, the physical vacuum or "microether" must be some kind of a perfect fluid. A "truly perfect" fluid is free from any thermal effect that is necessarily bound to dissipation, hence, as noted by Romani, it must be perfectly continuous at any scale. It is then characterized by its pressure and its density, which are connected by the state equation, and by its velocity. It exerts only pressure forces. Therefore, if one attempts to introduce a perfectly fluid ether "filling empty space," then any interaction forces "at a distance," thus including gravity, have to be ultimately explained as pressure forces, and hence as contact actions." I think that Arminjon is taking the first steps toward a real unified theory which must be based on the true properties of space. It is the density differentials of space and the pressure waves (forces) of the ether that constitute a foundation for a complete theory of matter and energy. In Ether and Relativity, 1920, Sidelights on Relativity, page 23, Einstein writes: "Recapitulating, we may say that according to the general theory of relativity space is endowed with physical qualities in this sense, therefore, there exists an ether. According to the general theory of relativity space without an ether is unthinkable for in such a space there would not only would be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards of space and time (measuringrods and clocks), nor therefore any space-time intervals in the physical sense. But this ether may not be thought of as endowed with the quality characteristic of ponderable media, as consisting of parts which may be tracked through time. The idea of motion may not be applied to it." Einstein admits that space is endowed with physical properties, as it must be in order to conform to geometrical distortions and affirms that, in that sense, there is an ether, but does not ascribe any motion to this ether. Since further developments postulated the existence of gravitational waves, it is difficult to reconcile this early statement with modern thinking on the subject. The empty space within atoms or the distant spaces that separate galaxies is referred to as the physical vacuum. The physical vacuum is considered far from empty. It is seething with activity. Physicists describe a vacuum constantly boiling with virtual particles that appear and disappear out of the depths of space. The "Casimir Effect" is cited as experimental evidence of this activity in the physical vacuum. More recent theorists Carlo Rovelli (University of Pittsburgh) and Lee Smolin (Pennsylvania State University) completed their analysis of a quantum gravity model developed by Abhay Ashtekar at Syracuse University in 1985. Unlike string theory, Ashtekar's work applies only to gravity. However, it posits that at the Planck scale, space-time dissolves into a network of "loops" that are held together by knots. Somewhat like a chain-mail coat used by knights of yore, space-time resembles a fabric fashioned in four dimensions from these tiny one-dimensional loops and knots of energy. These theories of the physical vacuum are based on theoretical work in quantum theory and string theory, but may not necessarily be correct. There is room for other models including a hydrodynamic model as postulated here. Flowing gravity is based on a general hypothesis that space has physical properties that can best be described as super fluidic. By postulating the superfluid nature of space problems in controlling gravity and inertia can be clearly approached. New understandings in electromagnetic phenomena, nuclear and particle physics, cosmology, and the basis of quantum mechanics may be clarified with this shift of emphasis. What remains is to develop a more specific theory and a general theory that can make predictions that are in accord with natural measurements and observations and to devise experiments that can test the nature of the space medium.

Offline iceweller

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
Tesla's Dynamic Theory of Gravity
« Reply #1 on: December 16, 2005, 01:52:56 AM »
 Actually, it seems as if everyone is trying to copy Tesla's ultimate theory in one way or the other. He has really put it all down back in 1893, and his Dynamic Theory of Gravity is still classified today. There's really no point in re-inventing it or trying to develop a "new" one - it's been there for over 100 years - it's just been covered up and occulted.'s_Dynamic_Theory_of_Gravity

  One day, when the main academic streams gratiously will all concur, this theory will be declassified (or viceversa). It will demonstrate how to use the medium as an infinite source of energy, which our universe continues to transfer, change and transform ad infinitum. The key to access the medium is in this theory and is in Tesla's writings, most of which have been naturally classified.